1.2. Agenda

This was the first meeting where incoming IAB members participated, so the meeting began with a short round of introductions. Three items were added to the agenda: .local, RIPE NCC key roll-over, and the liaison to the Unicode Consortium.

1.3. Administrivia

Olaf gave a summary of IAB liaison shepherding, and asked existing shepherds to (i) document on the IAB wiki the motivation and goals for the liaison relationship and (ii) to contact the IETF liaison managers for an update prior to the IETF meeting.

Dow indicated that Andrei and Bernard had volunteered to assist with the IAB website overhaul, a tentative work item for the next 6-9 months.

1.4. Meeting Minutes

No meeting minutes were reviewed during this call.

2. On Old and New IAB

2.1. Logistics for the Next Several Weeks

Olaf asked incoming IAB members to fully participate in IAB discussions from this point forward, and noted that formal turn- over with respect to official decisions would take place at the Thursday plenary at IETF 77. One exception is that the incoming IAB will be responsible for selecting the ISOC BoT for the IETF.

2.2. Retreat Planning

Olaf asked everyone to complete the doodle poll for the IAB retreat dates.

ISOC is working on putting together the next issue of the IETF Journal (to come out after IETF 77) – any suggestions for articles would be welcomed. Please submit articles to <ietfjournal@isoc.org>

II. FCC Meeting

Lynn St.Amour, Leslie Daigle, Sally Wentworth (ISOC’s North American Bureau Manager) along with Russ Housley met with FCC Commission staff on February 16th to introduce them to the Internet Ecosystem and development model in general, as well as the particulars of IETF work. Ex parte notice attached.

III. ITU IPv6 Group Meeting

ISOC is planning to attend the March 15-16 meeting of the “ITU group to conduct further activities toward the implementation of WTSA Resolution 64 (aka ITU IPv6 group),” as are all of the RIRs and ICANN. The ITU Council set it up as a joint effort by the Directors of the Standardization and Development sectors. The terms of reference are:

To draft a global policy proposal for the reservation of a large IPv6 block, taking into consideration the future needs of developing countries, as outlined in paragraph 23 of C09/29.

To further study possible methodologies and related implementation mechanisms to ensure ‘equitable access’ to IPv6 resource by countries.

To further study the possibility for ITU to become another Internet Registry, and propose policies and procedures for ITU to manage a reserved IPv6 block.

To further study the feasibility and advisability of implementing the CIR model for those countries who would request national allocations.

To assist in the implementation of the project called for by Resolution 64, taking into account the needs at regional and national level in terms of capacity building and allocation policies.

To report to ITU Council 2010.

Obviously this represents a fairly aggressive move by some ITU Member States to have the ITU take an active role in IP address allocation. ISOC has submitted an information document to the meeting <http://www.isoc.org/pubpolpillar/docs/address-allocation_200906.pdf>, and will be participating to provide information about IP addressing issues, the Internet model, and to advocate for governments getting involved in the existing institutions to address their concerns rather than setting up new, duplicative, and potentially disruptive institutions of their own.

3.2. RFC Editor Liaison

Sandy introduced her written report, and added that the backlog for the Independent and IRTF Streams is down to just a few documents.

<begin RFC Editor Liaison written report>

RFC Editor Report to the IAB

1) February Publications — Clearing out the Independent and IRTF submissions

32 RFCs Published

19 Independent Submissions
7 IRTF
6 IETF

2) We were made aware that some RFC announcements did not get posted to the ietf-annonce list properly (December 2009 – 3 / January 2010 – 4). We forwarded the original announcements to the ietf-announce list.

3.3. IESG Liaison

There was a short discussion of the IPR situation raised in item #3 of Ron’s written report. Russ indicated that Cisco had put forward some new text and that we’re waiting to see if that is acceptable. The discussion is taking place on the ROLL list.

<begin IESG Liaison written report>

Roll IPR Issue
==============

On tomorrow’s IESG call, Adrian Farrel will report on an IPR issue in the ROLL WG. Details are not important right now, but three things are becoming aparent:

This issue may impact the SmartGrid initiative because some vendors are asking that the output of ROLL must not form part of the SmartGrid initiative until the IPR issue is resolved.

The push-back, if successful, might have repercussions for the use of the popular license terms associated with IPR disclosures. The essence of the pushback is that the terms (such as those used by telecom equipment vendors) may be fair and balanced when a group of vendors typically all have IPR in each other’s spaces, but is not reasonable when the IETF is moving towards a new technology area (since the trade in the license terms is “all your IPR in exchange for this one license”).

We do not appear to have discussed a policy for “late” disclosures. Late disclosure in this case has led some people to assume that the lead authors moved the solution down the track of their IPR. Although we have strong words that say what contributors are supposed to do, we don’t know what to do when they don’t do it. (Clearly the courts can make their own decisions, but this is not so helpful to us.) Obviously, most late disclosures will be snafus, but the damage they can do the IETF process might lead us to conclude we need to beat people with a larger carrot.

Appeals
=======
Two appeals have been promised, but none have been received yet.

<end IESG Liaison written report>

3.4. IRTF Chair

Aaron gave a verbal summary of recent IRTF activity. A new RG was chartered on virtualization. Seven IRTF RFCs have been published. The IAB will meet with the SAM RG at IETF 77, and Aaron has been talking with a number of researchers about a possible BOF on the Internet of Things. He added that Mat Ford (ISOC) has been holding some invite-only meetings for researchers, and they have been discussing a possible “spanning research” RG.

The group then entered into a discussion of IAB BOF shepherding and the evolving nature of the BOF process. Russ agreed to raise the topic of IAB BOF support at the next IESG meeting.

<no IRTF Chair written report was submitted>

4. Document Review and Approval

4.1. draft-iab-iana

It was agreed to post draft-iab-iana as soon as the nits are fixed.

4.2. draft-iab-anycast-arch-implication

It was agreed that there is IAB support for this document, but that more work is needed before it is ready to publish.

4.3. draft-jabley-sink-arpa

Note: Ralph Droms joined the call for this item

The board discussed potential problems with the approach in the sink.arpa draft. Ralph will take questions back to the document author.

5. IAB Schedule at IETF 77

The board reviewed the schedule for the upcoming IETF meeting. Olaf reminded the group that at IETF 77 the IAB will need to select an IAB Chair, and confirm the Executive Director and IAB Liaison to the IESG.

6. UNESDA “Enhanced cooperation on public policy issues pertaining to the Internet”

The IAB recently received a request from the United Nations to update their previous correspondence on the topic of Enhanced Cooperation. Andrei agreed to work with Dow to update the document.

7. All Other Business (AOB)

7.1. RIPE NCC Key Rollover

Olaf reported on the message from the RIPE NCC on the upcoming key rollover event, which will occur in a little different manner than the published policy. He did not see reason for concern, and no IAB action was identified, but he asked other members to review the message and raise any concerns to the IAB list.

7.2. .local

Olaf updated the .local draft and asked others to comment before the draft submission deadline on Friday.

7.3. T-RSE Update

Note: Bob Hinden joined the call for items 7.3 and 7.4.

There was a short discussion of the T-RSE situation with liaisons on the call, so the conversation was kept at a high level. Bob summarized the current negotiations, and the proposed work plan and timeline.

EXECUTIVE SESSION:

At this point in the call the IAB dropped into an executive session in order to discuss the T-RSE negotiations in more detail. Sandy and Aaron left the meeting at this time.

7.3. T-RSE Update (continued)

Bob walked through the T-RSE contract details with the IAB and gave his suggested way forward. After some discussion, there was clear IAB agreement to proceed with the plan Bob described.

7.4. Liaison to the Unicode Consortium

John will post the final copy of the liaison to the Unicode Consortium to the IAB list today.